62
The Jewish Home | JULY 7, 2022
From the Fire Parshas Chukas
The Language of the Generation By Rav Moshe Weinberger Adapted for publication by Binyomin Wolf
R
egarding the nature of Moshe Rebbeinu’s sin in striking the rock to bring forth water for the Jewish people, Rav Shmuel Dovid Luzzatto, zt”l, the great-grandson of the Ramchal, wrote, “While Moshe Rebbeinu only committed on sin, the commentaries heaped thirteen or more sins upon him because each one attributed some novel sin based on his own understanding...” The Torah tells us very little about the reason for the drastic consequences of Moshe’s sin. We must therefore understand the commentaries’ explanations rather than inventing any new sins to add to the already-long list. There is a well-known dispute between the Rambam (Shmonah Perakim, Ch. 4) and Rashi (on Bamidbar 20:12) regarding the nature of Moshe’s sin. According to the Rambam, his sin was excessive anger when he said, (Bamidbar 20:10) “Listen, you rebels.” According to Rashi, however, his sin was disobeying G-d by hitting the rock when he was commanded to speak to the rock. While the Ramban takes issue with both of these explanations, the Maharal in Gur Areye and Rav Levi Yitzchak of Berditchev in Kedushas
Levi explain that, on a deeper level, the Rambam’s and Rashi’s explanations are not mutually exclusive. Each refer to a different stage in one process. The process began with Moshe becoming angry and that anger caused him to disobey Hashem’s command to speak to the rock. Hashem speaks to us in every generation through the Torah as if it is being given today. We must therefore understand what we must learn from the nature of Moshe’s sin in order to know what is right in our own generation. The first step in that process is understanding the difference between the events in Parshas Chukas and the events in Parshas Beshalach when Moshe first drew water from a rock (Shemos 17:1-7). There, the people lacked water and came to complain to Moshe; Moshe told Hashem that he was afraid they would kill him; Hashem told him to hit a rock; he did so; and water began flowing from the rock to fulfill the Jewish people’s need for water. What is the difference between these two events? Why was it a mitzvah for Moshe to hit the rock shortly after the Jewish people left Egypt but a grave sin to
do so in their last year in the desert before entering Eretz Yisroel? The difference was the generation. Moshe was commanded to hit the rock for the generation who left Egypt. This older generation grew up as slaves in Egypt. They were familiar with the language of force and harshness. For them, when Moshe hit the rock, using force to extract the water, he was speaking the language of the old style of education understood by that generation. However, the generation in Parshas Chukas lived forty years later. They grew up in the desert protected by Hashem who provided for all of their needs. They were a softer, weaker generation. This new generation, on the brink of entering Eretz Yisroel, understood a different language. Hashem expected Moshe to speak to the new generation in a language it understood, the language of conversation, speech, and dialogue. That is why He commanded Moshe only to speak to the rock and not to strike it. In our times, too, we see this distinction between the “old generation” and the “new generation.” Our parents and grand-
parents who lived through the war grew up for the most part under the control of totalitarian regimes or dictatorships and were accustomed to the harsh language of force. That generation also educated its children using the language of strict discipline and force. That approach does not work in the current generation. The old generation was not broken by the old approach to education. But if anyone tries to use the old way of discipline on the new generation, he will only shatter the lives of his students. Such an approach to education no longer works. It is simply outdated. What happened to Moshe Rebbeinu in Parshas Chukas? When he lifted up his staff to hit the rock just as he had done forty years earlier for the previous generation, he revealed that, on his level, he did not appreciate the difference between the generations. As great as he was, he could not speak the language of the new generation. He was still educating people the way it was done in the “old country.” He did not understand how to communicate with the generation in its way, which was through speech, conversation, and dia-
